In 2009, I had my first encounter with the devastating consequences of unchecked education agents. A group of students from Hyderabad, India, arrived in Minneapolis, MN, with dreams of earning a world-class education. Instead, they found themselves stranded—misled by agents who had promised them everything from top-tier degrees to guaranteed jobs and pathways to permanent residency. The reality was far different.
The university they had been placed in was unaccredited. Their visas were in jeopardy. Their families had exhausted their savings to send them abroad, only for them to be left desperate, destitute, and terrified of what would happen next.
That moment was the catalyst for Gen Next.
But 15 years later, the same problems persist. And in some ways, they’ve gotten worse. The recent headlines surrounding ApplyBoard have reignited a long-simmering conversation about the role of agents and agent aggregators in international student recruitment. At its core, the controversy underscores a fundamental flaw in the way international education has been commercialized: when financial incentives take precedence over student success, the entire system suffers.
Charlie Munger famously said: “Show me the incentive, and I will show you the outcome.”
This quote highlights how financial incentives drive behavior, often in ways that can lead to unintended or unethical consequences. It’s particularly relevant in the international student recruitment industry, where commission-based models and opaque agent networks have incentivized volume over value, leading to the very problems we see today.
The rise of large-scale agent aggregators has only exacerbated this issue, creating a machine where students become little more than transactions. Many of these platforms boast about democratizing access to global education, yet their unchecked expansion has led to widespread concerns, ranging from students arriving unprepared for academic success to fraudulent applications and visa rejections. In Canada, the fallout is now impossible to ignore, and other countries should take note before they face similar crises.
The Inconvenient Truth
The reality is that the traditional agency model, when unchecked, has bred complacency and opportunism. In many cases, agents who are supposed to serve as trusted advisors have turned into brokers, focused on commissions rather than counseling. The rise of large aggregators has further diluted accountability, making it harder to ensure quality control.
On the other hand, the rush to meet enrollment targets has led many institutions to overlook due diligence, relying on intermediaries with little transparency.
I’ve never been a fan of the agent model, but I recognize that when properly trained and held accountable, good agents can serve a necessary role in the international education ecosystem. The real responsibility, however, falls on institutions to carefully vet, train, and monitor their recruitment partners, ensuring they act as genuine advisors rather than profit-driven middlemen.
For high school counselors, the challenge has been even greater, as they often lack visibility into where their students are being funneled.
And for students and parents, the system remains opaque—promises are made, paperwork is signed, dream castles are built on shaky foundations constructed with glossy brochures and grand assurances—yet too many students find themselves in situations they were never properly prepared for.
Our industry is at an inflection point. We must move away from models that treat students as commodities and instead embrace approaches that prioritize long-term student success.
Here’s how we do it:
Universities must take back control. Relying on third-party intermediaries without oversight has proven to be a costly mistake. Institutions must build direct relationships with high schools, trusted counselors, and ethical recruitment partners and agents to ensure students receive the guidance they deserve.
Transparency and accountability must become non-negotiable. The industry needs clear, public disclosures on how students are being recruited. Institutions should disclose which agents they work with and how much commission is being paid to each. They should also hold recruitment partners to rigorous ethical standards, with consequences for those who exploit students.
A shift to student-centric models. Recruitment should be about more than just filling seats. Students need comprehensive pre-departure support, clear guidance on academic expectations, and a realistic understanding of job opportunities post-graduation. Institutions that ignore these responsibilities are setting students up for failure.
